TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (7) TMI 686
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e of bogus bills/invoices without any supply of goods/services has been busted by Noida Police PS, Sector-20, Noida on 31.05.2023. Noida Police filed a First Information Report (FIR) in this case number 203/2023 & 248/2023 dated 01.06.2023 and now they have filed chargesheet under section 420/467/468/471/120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. dated 29.08.2023 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Gautam Buddh Nagar. Analysis of data/information shared by Noida Police, revealed that the accused persons of that case had created fake 3100 mother firms (2528 firms on removing duplicate entries) and passed on fake GST of Rs. 2645.29 Crores. DGGI being specialist agency for tax evasion took up the case and due to the spread of the ultimate beneficiaries across the country and scarcity of resources the beneficiary firms were distributed. From 2528 mother firms Input Tax Credit (ITC) was passed on to 6492 firms. 114 mother firms out of 2528, falling under the jurisdiction of DGGI, Meerut zonal unit have been taken up for investigations by Meerut Unit. The data relating to the 114 mother firms has been analysed and 22 mother firms have been prima facie found involved in passing on of f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ply of goods/services has been found involving Rs. 163.49 crore. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the present complaint has been registered on the basis of the information shared by the Noida Police related to GST evasion which is alleged to be based on false and bogus facts. The petitioner/applicant was remanded to judicial custody on 19.07.2023 and since then he has been in continuous judicial custody. In the remand application dated 19.07.2023, it was alleged that scrutiny of the information/details shared by Noida Police revealed that the accused persons had made fake 3100 firms and passed on fake GST and further the custody was sought to unearth the evidence regarding the same. From the perusal of the remand application it is evident that the custody of the accused was sought to unearth the evidence and now when charge sheet/complaint has already been filed in the said case and the trial has not yet progressed, keeping the accused in custody in the said case is violation of Article 21 of the Constitution. The accused in the present case is in judicial custody since 19.07.2023 i.e., 01 year, nine months whereas the maximum period of punishment is five year....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... other conditions as may be imposed by the Court or the police in connection with the case. The Section 439 (CrPC) confers wider powers on the High Court and Court of Session. These courts can entertain bail applications in all non-bailable cases, even if they are punishable with death or life imprisonment. Moreover, they can exercise this power at any stage of the investigation, inquiry, or trial whereas the present case is compoundable with the maximum punishment of five years. Key Principles Governing Bail Under Section 439 While Section 439 grants wide discretionary powers, certain guiding principles are considered by courts when exercising these powers:- Gravity of the Offense:- Instruction No. 02/2022-23 (GST Investigation) annexed herewith, Likelihood of the Accused Absconding:- Ready to deposit his passport if issued in his name, Nature of Evidence:- Primarily Documentary and in the custody of the department, Previous Criminal Record:- Nothing has been filed on record, Delay in Trial:- The accused is in custody since 19.07.2023 and even after a period of more than 20 months no trial has yet started:- Protection of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... filed in the said case and the trial has not yet progressed, keeping the accused in custody in the said case is violation of Article 21 of the Constitution. Recently in Vineet Jain v. Union of India 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 513 the Apex Court strongly deprecated the routine denial of bail in CGST cases. The accused was charged under clauses (c), (f), and (h) of Section 132(1), which are serious but ultimately documentary offences. The brief facts are that the charge-sheet in the instant case had already been filed and the accused had been in custody for nearly seven months. There were no prior antecedents but the High Court had refused to grant bail. Saying that bail should be the normal in such cases, a bench comprising Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan observed:- "We are surprised to note that in a case like this, the appellant has been denied the benefit of bail at all levels, including the High Court and ultimately, he was forced to approach this Court. These are the cases where in normal course, before the Trial Courts, the accused should get bail unless there are some extra ordinary circumstances." The judgment in Vineet Jain has highlighted the need for a Refor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ty must be considered a punishment, unless it is required to ensure that an accused person will stand his trial when called upon. The courts owe more than verbal respect to the principle that punishment begins after conviction, and that every man is deemed to be innocent until duly tried and duly found guilty. 22. From the earliest times, it was appreciated that detention in custody pending completion of trial could be a cause of great hardship. From time to time, necessity demands that some unconvicted persons should be held in custody pending trial to secure their attendance at the trial but in such cases, "necessity" is the operative test. In this country, it would be quite contrary to the concept of personal liberty enshrined in the Constitution that any person should be punished in respect of any matter, upon which, he has not been convicted or that in any circumstances, he should be deprived of his liberty upon only the belief that he will tamper with the witnesses if left at liberty, save in the most extraordinary circumstances. 23. Apart from the question of prevention being the object of refusal of bail, one must not lose sight of the fact that any imprisonment be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ingh, learned counsel for the C.G.S.T. Department inter alia submitted that the applicants were arrested by Noida Police (P.S.-Sec.20, Noida) in a fake GST racket case under FIR No./Case Crime No.-203 of 2023 and 248 of 2023 under Sections 420/467/468/471/120-B of the Indian Penal Code and later on arrested by DGGI, Ghaziabad Regional Unit on 19.07.2023 and presently under judicial custody of the Hon'ble Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Meerut, at Gautam Buddha Nagar Jail. Based on scrutiny of the information/details shared by Noida Police, it was revealed that the accused persons had made fake 3100 mother firms and passed on fake GST of Rs.2645.29 Crores. Further he submitted that investigation against these firms was carried out by DGGI, Ghaziabad Regional Unit on Pan India Basis. Data of 114 firms falling under the jurisdiction of DGGI, Meerut Zonal Unit has been analysed, and 22 firms have been prima facie found involved in passion on of fraudulent Input Tax Credit (ITC) to the tune of Rs.14.65 Crores detected till date and during physical verification found non-existent. Investigation against these firms have been initiated in DGGI Ghaziabad under /F.No. DGGI/INV/GST/2118/....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... community can be manifested only at the cost of forfeiting the trust and faith of the community in the system to administer justice in an even-handed manner without fear of criticism from the quarters which view white-collar crimes with a permissive eye unmindful of the damage done to the national economy and national interest. Therefore, if let free, there is every chance that he will further tamper with the evidences or influence the witnesses, which will hamper the investigation. He may further commit similar offences in future and may cause further loss to the government exchequer. The applicant has committed an economic offence. It is respectfully submitted that observing that economic offences constitute a class apart and need to be visited with a different approach in the matter of bail. In Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy v. CBI (2013) 7 SCC 439, the Supreme Court held that economic offences constitute a class apart and need to be visited with a different approach in the matter of bail. The economic offences having deep-rooted conspiracies and involving huge loss of public funds need to be viewed seriously and considered as grave offences affecting the economy of the country as a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ble on file/record of active involvement of a person in tax evasion. He prayed rejection of the bail of the applicant. 9. A perusal of record reveals that the firms created, controlled which received/passed fraudulent ITC by the present accused person Yasin Shaikh and other co-accused persons namely (1) Deepak Murjhani (2) Gaurav Singhal (3) Arjit Goyal (4) Anchit Goyal and (5) Pradeep Goyal have fraudulently availed ITC to the tune of Rs 174.46 Crores based on fake invoices issued by the alleged fake suppliers, and fraudulently passed on the ITC to the tune of Rs 163.50 Crores by issuance of fake invoices without actual supply of any underlying goods. Accused persons (1) Yasin Shaikh (2) Deepak Murjhani (3) Gaurav Singhal (4) Arjit Goyal (5) Anchit Goyal and (6) Pradeep Goyal being the masterminds of these fake firms/companies are the persons who were in-charge of and were responsible for the conduct of business of these firms. Co-accused persons Vinita Murjhani and Gurmeet Singh Batra are the persons who have actively assisted the above persons in this offence as their partners in crime. It is evident from the perusal of the record that on 31.05.2023, on the information of an ....